RFC962 - TCP-4 prime

王朝other·作者佚名  2008-05-31
窄屏简体版  字體: |||超大  

Network Working Group M. A. Padlipsky

Request for Comments: 962 Mitre-Bedford

November 1985

TCP-4 Prime

STATUS OF THIS MEMO

This memo continues the discussion of a possible transaction oriented

transport protocol. This memo does not propose a standard.

Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

DISCUSSION

In response to Bob Braden's call for a transaction oriented

protocol (RFC-955), the following thoughts come to mind:

o The perceived problem is that connection set-up and tear-down

take too long.

o Other ASPects of TCP's reliability/robustness approach are

presumably still desirable.

o We have some spare command bits in the TCP header, and I trust

that there's still a version number field.

o So why not add NYS (no-way handshake) and NIF (graceless close)

commands to TCP and leave everything else as was (except for the

version, of course)?

Philosophically, that might be somewhat at variance with "the spirit of

TCP," but pragmatically it ought to do the trick. Some careful crafting

might be required for ISN handling with NYS, but my guess is that if you

have to resend the first/possibly only segment you just pretend you're

all of a sudden in the middle of SN space (initially you start at the

bottom of it) and when it sees the funny ISN the NYS handler knows it

should dequeue anything it might have had pending for (re)transmission

and start fresh, assuming that if anything gets through to the starting

side belatedly it'll get chUCked because of being well outside the left

edge of the window, if I'm remembering that part right--and please be

aware that I'm not bothering to confirm recollections because I don't

want to pretend that this is the spec: it's just meant to be the

concept, in TV talk. (On the NYS emitting side, presumably you just

drop right into ack_eXPected state--or whatever the right name is--after

setting an appropriate bit that'll get you to fiddle the ISN if you take

a timeout.) Maybe you even fiddle the ISNs more elaborately, to allow

for several false starts rather than "two strikes and you're out," and

maybe we take some spurious segment hits if SNs get suitably balled up,

but if you really think handshaking is too expensive then that's the way

the premise crumbles.

RFC962 November 1985

TCP-4 Prime

Speaking of graceless closes

 
 
 
免责声明:本文为网络用户发布,其观点仅代表作者个人观点,与本站无关,本站仅提供信息存储服务。文中陈述内容未经本站证实,其真实性、完整性、及时性本站不作任何保证或承诺,请读者仅作参考,并请自行核实相关内容。
 
 
© 2005- 王朝網路 版權所有 導航